Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

How much ignition are you running in your RB20 tune? It looks one the boost hits there isnt really much gained hp wise from more revs and the torque seems to die off real quickly.

The RB25 setup with the T67 looks the goods!

As much as it took without stopping making power... I think it was around 26 top end but don't quote me on that! Wouldn't ping regardless haha

That might be the small ports/factory intake etc holding the RB20 back, what turbo was on the 20 Simon?

Hypergear ATR43G3 0.63

Actually ended up going 517rwhp (386rwkw) without correction...

So that is a 127hp more than the RB20, plus it's 700rpm quicker to come on boost and nearly doubles torque between 3000rpm-5000rpm

Does nothing but burnouts in pretty much all gears

awesome build man nice power curve as well, and i'm tossing between this T67 vs GT35r -82r or GTX35r for my RB30det build

but i am on limited budget (2500) if you dont mind me asking how much is this turbo setup roughly ? turbo+gate and mani cheers

GTX35r are still very expensive and without exaust housing so my main choise would be T67 or GT35r looking for 400kw

awesome build man nice power curve as well, and i'm tossing between this T67 vs GT35r -82r or GTX35r for my RB30det build

but i am on limited budget (2500) if you dont mind me asking how much is this turbo setup roughly ? turbo+gate and mani cheers

GTX35r are still very expensive and without exaust housing so my main choise would be T67 or GT35r looking for 400kw

I would go this any day over a GT3582R, I have a pretty low opinion of them. The will probably make a bit more power but a fair bit laggier... GTX3582R is massive so you would probably be better at looking at a GTX3076R for similar sizing!

Turbo $879

Manifold $1300

Gate $375

If you were doing a Garrett add about a extra $500 for braided lines and double the price of the turbo (GTX probably a bit more)

That might be the small ports/factory intake etc holding the RB20 back, what turbo was on the 20 Simon?

mebbe...but i dont buy into that snmall port thing. An RB20 has larger valve area per cylinder then an SR20 so dont see that as being the problem. You only need ports and valves mig enough to cover the displacement of each cylinder...other wise velocity, cylinder filling etc goes to crap. Probably more to do with teh lil internal gate turbo with a small housing on funny fuel meaning the thing had so much back pressure it woudldnt take any ignition up top ?!?!?!?

mebbe...but i dont buy into that snmall port thing. An RB20 has larger valve area per cylinder then an SR20 so dont see that as being the problem. You only need ports and valves mig enough to cover the displacement of each cylinder...other wise velocity, cylinder filling etc goes to crap. Probably more to do with teh lil internal gate turbo with a small housing on funny fuel meaning the thing had so much back pressure it woudldnt take any ignition up top ?!?!?!?

Not sure what the issue was, it really did hit a brick wall at that power... but I'm pretty sure it had plenty of timing top end :)

Edited by SimonR32
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Out with the old Bride Brix...

2011-01-20181237.jpg

and in with the new, Bride Zeta II :)

2011-01-20181011.jpg

2011-01-20180949.jpg

Was in pretty average condition yesterday, gave it a nice clean and a bit of a fix up last night and looks heaps better now. Going to try a few things with it soon to get it looking nice and fresh soon. The old Brix will end up my passenger seat when I can find or swap my drivers rail for a passenger one.

Getting ready to track the Booga a fair bit soon so thought it might be a good idea to try and drop under bonnet temps a little bit... First on the list a Turbo Beanie and also have a roll of heat wrap that I'm going to do the dump with on the weekend :)

2011-01-24115726.jpg

2011-01-24173643.jpg

2011-01-24173716.jpg

Did the heat wrap on the dump today and finally got around to taking it for a quick burst with the new turbo bag (in the 38 degree heat)... All went really well, got back and could put my hand on the turbo bag for a few seconds so I guess the heat would have been around 70deg which would be several hundred lower than what it was originally. Dump was also cool enough for a quick touch.

The whole engine bay is now a fair whack colder, so job done. Now just time to get it back on the dyno :)

2011-01-29115201.jpg

2011-01-29120600.jpg

Went back for a touch up on the tune last night...

Ran a bit more boost and a bit more revs and it made a little more top end and mid range, also set up low boost for track work at 1.3bar and made 350rwkw or 475rwhp!

Here is the graph of the high boost run (note that correction being put on made a extra 20rwkw) so pretty similar top end to my last run

2011-02-03205959.jpg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
×
×
  • Create New...